On their return the apostles told him all that they had done. And he took them and withdrew apart to a town called Bethseda.
When the crowds learned it, they followed him, and he welcomed them and spoke to them of the kingdom of God and cured those who had need of healing.
Now the day began to wear away, and the twelve came and said to him, Lord the people are hungry.
Now Jesus turned to them and said “There are many complex reasons why people are hungry. The best way out of poverty is for them to get a job. Now bugger off while I eat these five loaves and two fishes.”
Now one amongst the faithful, a man named Marr, arose and said, “Lord, many of them do have a job, and yet they are still hungry. Behold, even here are hungry nurses”.
And the people were sore perplexed.
And Jesus looked upon the nurses and he said “Physicians, heal thyselves. Ha! See what I did there? Now bugger off and let me eat these loaves and fishes.”
Upon having refreshed himself with the loaves and fishes, Jesus turned to the text of his authorised biography.
On reading the story of his birth, Jesus called Luke and said unto him “Thou art my beloved biographer, in whom I am well pleased”.
“Verily, this story of my birth is well written. It will sell for many years. The Nativity will have a strong stable readership. Ha! See what I did there?”
“Now clear off and give me some peace, I have to send a letter to Tim Farron upon the evils of sodomy.”

Explanatory note: On the Marr programme today, Theresa May responded to an Andrew Marr question about nurses having to use foodbanks, having suffered a 14% wage cut since 2010. May, a strongly professed Christian, replied “there are many complex reasons why people use foodbanks” and “the best way out of poverty is to get a job.”

One Tory line which May used on both Marr and Peston, I have seen trotted out by the media themselves repeatedly in the last few days. May stated that under the Tories, the wealthiest 1% of taxpayers pay a higher proportion of taxes than ever under Labour. Adam Boulton was pushing this line on Sky News recently, using the figure that the wealthiest 1% pay 29% of income tax.

I have seen nobody make the obvious rejoinder. Under the Tories the wealthiest 1% have the greatest percentage of national income in modern political history. That is why they pay more tax. But due to tax avoidance, it remains the case that the wealthiest pay a lower percentage of their income in tax than any other group. There is no chance that this obvious reply will be given to Theresa May by an interviewer, or that Adam Boulton will start proclaiming it on the airwaves.

The above post is designed to highlight the hypocrisy of May and her unchristian attitudes. It in no way intends to insult the teachings of Jesus; rather the opposite.

402 thoughts on “The Gospel According To May”

All this attacking Theresa is a bit unfair – she is just doing what Tories do and have done since time immemorial i.e. looking after her own. I’m afraid insulting them will just not work as a political tactic.

I didn’t get where I am today, chief bogseat-changer for a corporate criminal portfolio by not insulting Tory stupidity….
Do you know, their idea for encourageing the autres, (that’s us) is to pin pictures of empty debt phials on the walls of the reception office, with a little red colour at the bottom of the phials. To remind the sales team to charge the customers in full.

Is there any reason you omitted to mention that the homeless people in question are Lithuanian nationals who speak a lot more Russian than English.

Do you have any solutions to this problem? If so what are they? Do these solutions involve the spending of money? If so whose? If it is your personal money then there is no issue, you can go and solve the problem with or without publicity as you may choose. If you have in mind the spending of someone else’s money then who are these people and why are they more responsible than you?

I think that Russian speaking Lithuanian nationals who who live in squalid underground tunnels have a lot of problems. Problems that have something to do with the fact that 9.4% of the population of Lithuania are Russian and that in Lithuania they are subject to discrimination. The costs of this discrimination are largely funded by the EU,

So the EU pays for and assists in the active discrimination of a Russian minority in Lithuania. This drives Russians out of Lithuania some of whom end up in squalid underground tunnels. Idiots (for that is what they are) take up their cause and agitate for someone, other than themselves, to fund and finance these people.

If such agitation is successful then word will get back to Lithuania and more of the Russian minority will make their way to the UK. This will encourage the Lithuanian authorities to step up their discrimination of their Russian minority and hey presto just like magic you have full blown ethnic cleansing.

I merely read the link you provided which states them to be Russian speaking Lithuanian nationals.

Their nationality matters a great deal – as it is the inevitable consequence of the principle of the free movement of people so beloved by the EU. This is the EU in action.

Ask yourself one simple question. If you were in some form of economic or social difficulty would you find it easier to attempt to rescue yourself if you were in a country where you spoke the language of that country.

I note that you do not offer an opinion as to whose responsibility it is to help these people. So presumably you do not consider it to be your personal responsibility.

The article states that there is assistance waiting for these homeless men but that they have chosen not to avail themselves of it. To be fair.

The reasons for that are another matter. Perhaps they fear being sent back to their country of origin if they are taken within the system. The article states that one of the men is here legally, but I wonder if he would be permitted to remain if he does not have work.

If he is an EU citizen he can come to the UK without a job and look for one when here. It happens all the time; most find work but a few unfortunate ones don’t. I don’t know whether he would be able to claim some kind of benefit.

Scottish Labour tweeted a pic of Alistair Darling and Ian Murray meeting young voters in what looks like the poshest café ever. Very conducive to a discussion on the plight of the precariat I’ve no doubt.

I strongly suspect Le Pen is going to win. I believe bans are being handed out to supporters of Le Pen, so I should be clear: this is a prediction, not a desire. I personally don’t know that much about Le Penism (chortle), though I am always wary when the word ‘fascist’ is banded about. Trump, for example, may well be a Manhattan Douchebag, but he isn’t a fascist. Rather harder question with Le Pen, who is very right wing, and appears to be making threats about closing down mosques, which isn’t very clever. I believe there is also some good old ‘questioning the details’ of the holocaust for good measure, which I assume is dog-whistling, rather than out-right denial, but perhaps I am being naive.

Sadly, Macron is an atrocious globalist dip-shit, so the choice is even worse than in the US. Vote Corbyn everyone, the UK has a real choice.

Rather than fascist(much-overused and laughable outside Italy according to Mussolini), I see Le Pen pere et fille springing from Poujadisme, a well-muscled movement of small shopkeeers and such against enarque- planned development and chain stores.At most, It may well have helped keep traditional small-town France alive.In England, Thatcher the grocer’s daughter, both actual and political(from the Private Eye Grocer Heath) was co-opted by the PTB to rolling back Butskillisme and the Welfare State rather than defanding her’class’interests.

I don’t. The situation isn’t like Trump (a fact that most Anglo-Americans fail to understand, having been taken over by the populists themselves, and imagining that France must be the same). Most of the voters for others in the first round are going to grit their teeth, and vote for Macron – that’s my impression – though she will do strongly (to judge from the voting map). Even Melenchon and his supporters are going to vote for Macron, though he can’t bring himself to say it.

The problem lies in Le Pen’s party, their people don’t come over well, although Le Pen herself is all very nice. Even the youthful niece is pretty evil. It’s why Le Pen has been distancing herself from her party, they’re a big drag on her. Kippers, but much more so.

Your suspicion – as so often – is ill founded : she will lose heavily.

But not as heavily as the Old Bruiser (aka Jean-Marie Le Pen) lost against M. Chirac in 2002 (ca 18% against ca 82%). I would speculate that it could be around 70% to 30% this time round.

With reference to Laguerre’s comment further down, it is beyond doubt that (1) Mme Le Pen has been rowing back hard from some of her previous statements (the euro is but one example) in an effort to pull in more votes (SORRY, NORTON, BETTER LUCK NEXT TIME!) and (2) the politbureau and elected representatives of the FN – including her current paramour – are a ghastly lot but it is otiose to speculate whether sdhe is nastier than they or they nastier than her.

All for now on this theme, waiting for more input from our French visitors.

Talking of populism,Trump does still seems to be intent on breaking log- jams business break-through style by personally inviting President Duterte to Washington even as the largest Chinese fleet since the early Ming dynasty puts in at Davao, the latter’s home town and power base.CNN disapproves because Duterte called a spade an s.o.b. and replicates the US-supported and excused Thaksin’s war on drugs in Thailand.
Trump says he is also prepared to meet with KimJong Un,a proferred carrot, that could also keep people in South Korea on-board with the US following the likely election of the less pro American but rather uninspiring Moon Jae-In.US recognition and respect are important to the North and Fort Knox needs its tungsten.
So , I still have some hopes for Trump for aw -that and aw that

I hope you’re wrong, but if Le Pen doesn’t win, once again all the concerns of those otherwise decent people who were persuaded to vote for her will be dismissed.

Immigration concerns will be waved away. The populist message that she’s attempting here (although it would never have been implemented!) about exporting jobs and enriching banksters will be forgotten about, there’s no problem, nothing to see, move along.

Why is nobody having an honest discussion about the concerns of the majority, other than the fascist Reicht and socialists? The natural parties of socialists have been corrupted beyond belief, so all that’s left as any alternative to the happy-clappy “third-way” neo-cons is a fascist party, or hard-right Conservatives.

Apart from Corbyn, of course. Which the Establishment cronies will want to dismiss out of hand, without ever daring – not for a moment – to deal with his policies. No, it’s his… his… leadership! Look at the beard! OMG, he does gardening in an allotment! What about his appearance? Huh! Huh!

Look over your shoulders, Establishment cronies. The fascists will throw you aside like a used condom the moment you stop being useful.

It would, wouldn’t it? That many Brexiteers here are very much interested in busting the EU by walking away from it all and doing what the establishment wants. Marseillaise and rousing speeches on the BBC do help a lot to garner favours here, so I’m not surprised that many here promote French fascists.

If Macron looses, which is not impossible, and our very own Maggie may would love this to happen as it gives her Kitten heels some spring during the next round of laissez faire cuts to pensions and disability PIP’s,etc.etc.

For the same reasons she better watch out that her cotton wool campaign of disengagement works well, that all her dependent BBC staff and MI’s are up for the challenge. I expect that this election will be that of mega cheats doing their best to make it look democratic.

Letting go of this unfair electoral system, always resisted by our elected representatives, only grudgingly did they accept an ultimatum, offering a take it or leave vote on the possibly worst kind of electoral system in AV+, is the key to change in this country.

All those resisting do it for the purpose of keeping the status quo alive!

Of course Macron could lose, even from his current 20 point lead (May could too, and her lead is much less, having declined in the last week, but you’d be hard put to find many people who are ready to say she will lose). But I don’t think he is going to lose. It’s all a bit too difficult for Le Pen to win. Lots of factors. Do French people really want revolution, and the inevitable decline in living standards? Are they really that dissatisfied (ils sont râleurs, les français – moaners)? There’s not much enthusiasm for Frexit – the EU has actually been very good for France. If she does win, she has no parliamentary representation (nor does Macron, but forming a coalition is easier for him), so it will be cohabitation – her against the Assemblée and the Sénat, even after the parliamentary elections coming. I could probably think of more things, if I had the time, but I suspect people are going to grit their teeth and vote for Macron.

Oh yeah, and I don’t think abstentionism is going to be a serious danger now. It was. My friend wasn’t going to bother voting in the second round, if there wasn’t a good candidate. Now she’s changed her mind. I think, like in Britain, this election is seen as a very important one for the future.

“… if Le Pen doesn’t win, once again all the concerns of those otherwise decent people who were persuaded to vote for her will be dismissed.”
____________________

There is certainly the risk of that. It is more or less what a spokeswoman for M. Melenchon was saying the other day. When asked to comment about the intention of the other parties to erect a “wall” (or “dam”) around the FN – as happened in 2002 – she said that that was all very well but the problem was that every time that happens the waters on the other side rise higher (the implication being that one day the dam risked being breached).

The unpredictability of Donald Trump’s approach to the Middle East means The United Kingdom should no longer support U.S.A.
foreign policy in The Middle East, peers have said.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39775694

The Lords have been working on this some time, so not sure if the 59 Tomahawk Missile strike feeds into their thinking.

“It beggars belief, who anyone could want more of the same in France.”

In Norton’s mind, an accusation by an opponent suddenly becomes the truth. It’s what Brexit does to you, folks. You should listen more to Radio Four, Norton. They had a long piece on the Today programme this morning campaigning in favour of Marine Le Pen. Your heart would be warmed.

Laguerre I do listen to radio 4 but here in England we call it wireless station four.
This is because we live in the past, you know, in the days before the European Union tried to snuff all life out of Europe.
Green pensions to drop another 18% to give German Banksters more profit.

The most succinct comment on the Marr/May interview came from a friend who takes an interest in the problems of AI:
“in May we have discovered a new species: our first Prime Minister who fails the Turing Test.”

I’ve had two council election leaflets through my door so far. One’s from the Tory. Lots of pictures of Tory with traffic cone, Tory with kiddies, Tory with hard hat, etc. Constituency is wonderful, such lovely people, instantly forgot the rest.

And there’s the Labour one, with specific policies on specific issues, list of candidates, no pictures. I’ll buy that.

I bumped into my local Independent candidate, A I Willie McKay OBE Nobull Prize, in the street in Wick and he asked me for my vote which he will get. He’s an ideal candidate, his work takes him all over the county talking to people, hearing their views, listening to their complaints. He has his finger on the pulse and will work for the local people not for his party in Edinburgh.

Well the extent of Theresa May’s delusions over a quick Brexit have come home to roost. As Junker, relays the arrogance and incompetents of Theresa May and her bungling Brexiteers.

First up May and her right hand man David Davis(soon to be axed for interfering with RIPA) allegedly argued, and huffed and puffed in Junkers presence that Britain did not need to pay the whopping divorce bill, of which some say it could be as much as £60 billion quid.

Junkers alledgedly soon put the May and Davis in their place by saying, no pay no deal.

Next up alledgedly May hinted that she thought citizenship of EU nationals and UK nationals could be sorted out in a jiffy. Junkers allegedly produced several bundles of weighty documents and said to May, this is just Croatia’s entry document, which has to be agreed by the other 26 nations, all of which will need to agree deals with Croatia, on matters such as health etc.

May allegedly said to Junker at the meeting that she was expecting to be re-elected as PM, and that she wanted to make Brexit a success. Junker again is alleged to have said Britain will now be a third state, and not in the customs union, which means Brexit cannot be a success.

There you have it straight from the horse’s mouth, Brexit cannot be a success, remember that, when you’re scrambling for a life-jacket on the decks sinking ship known as HMS Brexitania.

There’s plenty of woo-woo stuff around (if you care to find it) about the consequences of Scottish independence but you’re not regurgitating that. Perhaps you’re resigned to the fact that independence ain’t going to happen.

The argument about whether the UK will have to reach agreement with the EU on the “principles” agreed by Heads (the UK bill, etc..) before future trade arrangements can be discussed/agreed is a false one or, to say it better, a red herring.

Why is that?

Because – as everyone who has ever been involved in complex, multifaceted international negotiations knows – the basic principal of such negotiations is that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”.

Repeat : “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”

This means that if there is agreement, first, on the EU’s principles, that agreement is conditional on there being agreement, subsequently, on the future trade arrangements. Or, to put it differently. there needs to be agreement on all the components before a final, global agreement can be said to exist.

That is the normal situation. But in this instance the EU are saying they will not follow that and wish to agree certain things before they will move on and discuss others. For that to proceed by insistence of one party rather than a mutually agreed methodology is unusual, certainly, and a power-play by the EU.

Even with respect to income tax, if the wealthiest are paying 29% of income tax while able to avoid – and evade – tax on a large proportion of their income – as appears to be the case – then how much of income tax would they be paying if they were pulling their fair weight? With tax avoidance and evasion, 29% of income tax relates to massively more than 29% of income. Surely it is fair to say that the wealthiest 1% are likely to be avoiding and evading tax on the most massive scale. Therefore it would not be surprising if, on average, they are only paying income tax on 10% or less of their morally-taxable income (maybe even 1% or 1/10th %, who knows).

Looking increasingly like strong and stable = weak and wobbly and not to be trusted one inch even by her own PR team! I do hope May is not under too much strain and having difficulty coping… perhaps a crash test dummy should stand in to take the strain off all involved?

My chances of being PM are about as good as the chances of finding Elvis on Mars, or my being reincarnated as an olive.— Boris Johnson, UK Foreign Secretary

Few characters in history have seen so much spoken about him for one seemingly so irrelevant. Out of obscure follies and foolhardy decisions, he rose from being a questionable journalist for The Times, sacked, no less, for falsifying the news, to being editor at The Spectator. He also became a local Tory MP. Stints at publicity and image management started to push him into the fray.